Log in

View Full Version : Glorious Chinese socialist paradise gives a helping hand to Brazil



caramelpence
28th May 2011, 16:31
URUAÇU, Brazil — When the Chinese came looking for more soybeans here last year, they inquired about buying land — lots of it.

Officials in this farming area would not sell the hundreds of thousands of acres needed. Undeterred, the Chinese pursued a different strategy: providing credit to farmers and potentially tripling the soybeans grown here to feed chickens and hogs back in China.

“They need the soy more than anyone,” said Edimilson Santana, a farmer in the small town of Uruaçu. “This could be a new beginning for farmers here.”

The $7 billion agreement signed last month — to produce six million tons of soybeans a year — is one of several struck in recent weeks as China hurries to shore up its food security and offset its growing reliance on crops from the United States by pursuing vast tracts of Latin America’s agricultural heartland.

Even as Brazil, Argentina and other nations move to impose limits on farmland purchases by foreigners, the Chinese are seeking to more directly control production themselves, taking their nation’s fervor for agricultural self-sufficiency overseas.

“They are moving in,” said Carlo Lovatelli, president of the Brazilian Association of Vegetable Oil Industries. “They are looking for land, looking for reliable partners. But what they would like to do is run the show alone.”

While many welcome the investments, the aggressive push comes as Brazilian officials have begun questioning the “strategic partnership” with China encouraged by former President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. The Chinese have become so important to Brazil’s economy that it cannot do without them — and that is precisely what is making Brazil increasingly uneasy.

“One thing the world can be sure of: there is no going back,” Mr. da Silva said while visiting Beijing in 2009.

China has become Brazil’s biggest trading partner, buying ever increasing volumes of soybeans and iron ore, while investing billions in Brazil’s energy sector. The demand has helped fuel an economic boom here that has lifted more than 20 million Brazilians from extreme poverty and brought economic stability to a country accustomed to periodic crises.

Yet some experts say the partnership has devolved into a classic neo-colonial relationship in which China has the upper hand. Nearly 84 percent of Brazil’s exports to China last year were raw materials, up from 68 percent in 2000. But about 98 percent of China’s exports to Brazil are manufactured products — including the latest, low-priced cars for Brazil’s emerging middle class — that are beating down Brazil’s industrial sector.

“The relationship has been very unbalanced,” said Rubens Ricupero, a former Brazilian diplomat and finance minister. “There has been a clear lack of strategy on the Brazilian side.”

While visiting China last month, Brazil’s new president, Dilma Rousseff, emphasized the need to sell higher-value products to China, and she has edged closer to the United States. “It is not by accident that there is a sort of effort to revalue the relationship with the United States,” said Paulo Sotero, director of the Brazil Institute at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. “China exposes Brazil’s vulnerabilities more than any other country in the world.”

China’s moves to buy land have made officials nervous. Last August, Luís Inácio Adams, Brazil’s attorney general, reinterpreted a 1971 law, making it significantly harder for foreigners to buy land in Brazil. Argentina’s president, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, followed suit last month, sending a law to Congress limiting the size and concentration of rural land foreigners could own.

Mr. Adams said his decision was not a direct result of land-buying by China, but he noted that huge “land grabs” in Latin America and sub-Saharan Africa, including China’s attempt to lease about three million acres in the Philippines, had alarmed Brazilian officials.

“Nothing is preventing investment from happening, but it will be regulated,” Mr. Adams said.

A World Bank study last year said that volatile food prices had brought a “rising tide” of large-scale farmland purchases in developing nations, and that China was among a small group of countries making most of the purchases.

Foreigners own an estimated 11 percent of productive land in Argentina, according to the Argentine Agriculture Federation. In Brazil, one government study estimated that foreigners owned land equivalent to about 20 percent of São Paulo State.

International investors have criticized the restrictions. At least $15 billion in farming and forestry projects in Brazil have been suspended since the government’s limits, according to Agroconsult, a Brazilian agricultural consultancy.

“The tightening of land purchases by foreigners is really a step backwards into a Jurassic mentality of counterproductive nationalism,” said Charles Tang, president of the Brazil-China Chamber of Commerce, saying that American farmers had bought sizable plots in Brazil in recent years, with little uproar.

Responding to the criticism, Brazil’s agriculture minister said this month that Brazil might start leasing farmland to foreigners, given the barriers to ownership.

China itself does not allow private ownership of farmland, and it cautioned local governments against granting large-scale or long-term leases to companies in a 2001 directive. China also bans foreign companies from buying mines and oil fields.

But as more of its people eat meat, China is expected to increase its soybean imports, mostly for animal feed, by more than 50 percent by 2020, according to the United States Department of Agriculture. Last month, Chongqing Grains signed a $2.5 billion agreement to produce soybeans in the Brazilian state of Bahia. Last October, a Chinese group agreed to develop about 500,000 acres of farmland in Río Negro Province in Argentina.

In both cases, Chinese officials proposed buying large tracts of land before local officials steered them toward production agreements.

“We are never going to sell the land,” said Juan Manuel Accatino, the minister of production in Río Negro.

Brian Willott, an American farmer who came to Brazil in 2003, said Chinese interest in buying farms had not abated. “Everywhere you go to look at a farm they say, ‘We are considering selling to the Chinese,’ ” he said.

In Goiás State, nearly 70 percent of the soy grown went to the Chinese last year, and the Chinese are seeking to use about 20 million acres of pastureland that has not been cultivated for decades.

“For them, the faster the better,” said Antônio de Lima, Goiás’ agriculture minister.

Farmers here say they share Chinese officials’ goal of breaking the stranglehold of international trading companies like Cargill and Archer Daniels Midland.

But Tan Lin, a manager at the Chinese company involved in Goiás, said he doubted Chinese companies were ready to replace them.

“I don’t see that the Chinese companies working here have that expertise yet,” Mr. Tan said. But “if you can do that, it is good, of course.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/27/world/americas/27brazil.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

Pretty Flaco
28th May 2011, 16:49
Their interests are in a mutually beneficial relationship for proletarians everywhere. profit is for filthy capitalists, afterall....

Kiev Communard
28th May 2011, 17:19
Actually I have researched the economic relationship between the PRC and Latin American countries after the end of the Cold War as my MA thesis's theme, and I have to say that these relations indeed tend to resemble neocolonial ones. This fact perfectly flies in the face of the MIM-style "anti-imperialism" that basically asserts that "the only imperialists in the world are surely evol AmeriKKans". For more information on Chinese "socialist" corporations penetrating raw materials and capital markets of Latin America, promoting dependency relations and preventing the development of local manufacturing, one may consult the following sources:

1. Ciccantell P.S., Bunker S.G. The Economic Ascent of China and the Potential for Restructuring the Capitalist World-Economy / Paul S. Ciccantell, Stephen G. Bunker // Journal of World-Systems Research. – Vol. X. – No. 3. – Fall 2004. – P. 565 – 589.

2. China – Latin America: Economic Relations in the Twenty-First Century / [Dussel Peters E., Jenkins R., López A., et al.]; ed. by R. Jenkins and E. Dussel Peters. – Bonn: Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik, 2009.

3. Barbosa A. de Freitas. The Rising China and Its Impact on Latin America: Strategic Partnership or a New International Trap? / Alexandre de Freitas Barbosa // VIII Reunión de la Red de Estudios de América Latina y el Caribe sobre Asia – Pacífico (REDEALAP). – Bogotá: Universidad Externado de Colombia. – 27 y 28 de agosto de 2008. - http://www.iadb.org/intal/aplicaciones/uploads/ponencias/i_Foro_REDEALAP_2008_08_01_Barbosa.pdf (http://www.iadb.org/intal/aplicaciones/uploads/ponencias/i_Foro_REDEALAP_2008_08_01_Barbosa.pdf)

4. Hearn K. China’s “Peaceful” Invasion / Kelly Hearn // The Washington Times. – November 20, 2005.

5. Growing Energy Nexus: Energy-hungry China Looks to Latin America / The Economist. – April 10, 2007. - http://rss.economist.com/node/8991737

6. Gatlan K. Chinese Eye Brazil Farmland / Kieran Gatlan. – DTN/ The Progressive Farmer, April 28, 2010.

7. Gallagher K.P. New Estimates of China’s Foreign Investment in Latin America / Kevin P. Gallagher. – Triple Crisis Blog: The World Perspectives on Finance, Development and Environment. – September 21, 2010. - http://triplecrisis.com/new-estimates-of-china-foreign-investment-in-latin-america/ (http://triplecrisis.com/new-estimates-of-china-foreign-investment-in-latin-america/)

8. Factbox: China's Surging Direct Investment in Brazil / Reuters. – August 10, 2010. - http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE67948Q20100810 (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE67948Q20100810).

9. CNOOC, BEH to Jointly Buy Stakes in Pan American Energy from BP / Xinhua News. – November 29, 2010. - http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/china/2010-11/29/c_13626073.htm

10. Chery Auto to Build $700 Million Car Plant in Brazil // Business China. - http://en.21cbh.com/HTML/2010-8-11/4NMDAwMDE5MTU4Ng.html

11. Facchini G. et al. Substitutability and Protectionism: Latin America Trade Policy and Imports from China and India / Giovanni Facchini, Marcelo Olarreaga, Peri Silva and Gerald Willmann // Economics Working Paper. – No. 2007-08. – Dunedin: University of Otago Economics Discussion Papers. – No. 0705. – April 2007. - http://eprints.otago.ac.nz/590/1/DP_0705.pdf

12. González F. Latin America in the Economic Equation—Winners and Losers: What Can Losers Do? // China’s Expansion into the Western Hemisphere: Implications for Latin America and the United States / Francisco González. – Wash., D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2008.

Sinister Cultural Marxist
28th May 2011, 19:26
Anyone who thinks China isn't Imperialist needs to take a long, hard look at the acquisition by their state capital of land in the third world.

CesareBorgia
28th May 2011, 19:32
Anyone who thinks China isn't Imperialist needs to take a long, hard look at the acquisition by their state capital of land in the third world.

Then is Kuwait imperialist?

Would you rather Brazil not trade with anyone? Should it lock up its borders and beg for food aid like the North Koreans?

This is nothing more than two capitalist countries trading with eachother.

Get a grip guys, this isnt the evil Chinese raping the Brazilian proletariat.

Next thing you know you guys will line up behind American imperialism and claim the PRC the greatest danger to the working class.

This is the part that should have been bolded.
China has become Brazil’s biggest trading partner, buying ever increasing volumes of soybeans and iron ore, while investing billions in Brazil’s energy sector. The demand has helped fuel an economic boom here that has lifted more than 20 million Brazilians from extreme poverty and brought economic stability to a country accustomed to periodic crises.

RED DAVE
28th May 2011, 19:37
China has become Brazil’s biggest trading partner, buying ever increasing volumes of soybeans and iron ore, while investing billions in Brazil’s energy sector. The demand has helped fuel an economic boom here that has lifted more than 20 million Brazilians from extreme poverty and brought economic stability to a country accustomed to periodic crises.Prosperity through capitalism. 200+ years of success.

RED DAVE

CesareBorgia
28th May 2011, 19:49
Prosperity through capitalism. 200+ years of success.

RED DAVE

Capitalism is a socio-economic system that arose under certain objective conditions and was thoroughly revolutionary and progressive in its day.

The conditions for its overthrow have existed for only a little bit more than 100 years.

caramelpence
28th May 2011, 20:10
Then is Kuwait imperialist?

I think this is actually an interesting question because it bears on other countries that are similar to Kuwait in certain respects, i.e. in having relatively small populations, high GDP/capita, high levels of income inequality, highly mobile elites, dependence on external labour, and rich natural resource endowments and/or powerful financial sectors, such as Singapore and (though not a country) Hong Kong. I don't think these countries or territories are imperialist states in the same manner as, say, the United States or China, not least because they do not use military force in order to protect their interests, but they are focal points of power in the imperialist world-system, insofar as they are the spatial points through which capital and goods move, chiefly through their role as financial hubs, and at least two of the territories I mentioned - Hong Kong and Singapore - inherited their contemporary functions from their colonial roles as entrepots. I would be interested in whether there are any Marxists or world-systems theorists who have tried to fully theorize the role of countries like Kuwait - anyone got any reading recommendations here?

In any case, I think Kuwait and China are qualitatively different from one another in terms of their role within the imperialist world-system, but that doesn't mean that China isn't a centre of imperial power.


This is nothing more than two capitalist countries trading with eachother.

Trade has always been recognized as a central part of imperialism through the mechanisms of unequal exchange and enforced primary product dependency. It is not the central component of Lenin's account of imperialism insofar as Lenin sees the export of capital superseding the export of commodities as one of the defining characteristics of imperialism, considered as a stage of capitalism, but for dependency theory it is precisely through the enforcement of primary product dependency under conditions of free trade that underdevelopment is constantly maintained and reinforced, because countries that are just beginning to develop their manufacturing sectors generally find themselves unable to compete with those countries that have access to more advanced technology and other advantages. Obviously the economy of Brazil is not dependent on primary goods production in that Brazil is one of the most powerful manufacturing giants in the world but this article indicates that the export of manufactured products by China is having implications for the development of manufacturing industry in Brazil and that the purchase of land will extend imperialist penetration to the agricultural sector as well. I don't think that the concern of socialists should be to advise capitalist governments on how to overcome primary product dependency and encourage the growth of manufacturing industry through import substitution and the like but the dynamics of uneven and combined development are still central to a nuanced understanding of the imperialist world-system and the contemporary role of China within that system.


Actually I have researched the economic relationship between the PRC and Latin American countries after the end of the Cold War as my MA thesis's theme

Thank you for this bibliography!

RED DAVE
28th May 2011, 20:16
Capitalism is a socio-economic system that arose under certain objective conditions and was thoroughly revolutionary and progressive in its day.Wow. I didn't know that.

The bourgeoisie, historically, has played a most revolutionary part. (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/index.htm)


The conditions for its overthrow have existed for only a little bit more than 100 years.Well considering that the Communist Manifesto was written something over 150 years ago, I'd say you were a little off in your time frame.

In any event, there's no excuse for capitalism, Chinese or otherwise.

RED DAVE

tbasherizer
28th May 2011, 20:22
It's a fallacy to refer to China or Brazil as personifications. China isn't one monolithic entity to make decisions regarding the expansion of its corporations' activities. This shouldn't surprise anyone; as the Chinese government gives its national arm of international capital more leeway, the latter has more freedom to go wherever the interests of profit dictate. This is no ideological shift in the Chinese Communist Party's Politburo towards imperialism, but a result of its shift to market liberalism. This shouldn't really even be news to us socialists- 'Comrade' Deng let the Chinese bourgeoisie into the party a while ago. I don't even know why I'm saying this for it's obviousness.

CesareBorgia
28th May 2011, 20:26
Well considering that the Communist Manifesto was written something over 150 years ago, I'd say you were a little off in your time frame.

RED DAVE

You cant be serious? I'm off in my time frame? It's 2011 and I live in a wholly capitalist world, put down that pamphlet for second and look at reality.

Jose Gracchus
28th May 2011, 22:31
I can't believe I'm hearing people trot out the most puerile neoliberal excuses for imperialism, calling it development and trade like any Friedman-worshipper in any finance department, and thinks its clever simply because they replace "the United States" with
"'People's' China".

tbasherizer
28th May 2011, 22:46
If you're referring to me, I'm not trying to justify it, only rationalize it. To say that any country is consciously doing anything is hypernationalistic and bordering on conspiratorial. The forces of capital ignore the abstract constructs of nations and their institutions.

bailey_187
28th May 2011, 23:04
I'm interested to see what the "defenders of China against Imperialism", have to say concerning this.

Both to see how they attempt to claim China is not an imperialist power, or if they cant how exactly this is different from the "inter-imperialist" conflicts that Lenin and other Marxists refused to take sides on in the early 20th century.

Because this is essentialy, the expansion of Chinese capital?

I may be very wrong here, but can (albeit loose) paralels between China now and Germany at the turn of the century be drawn? Both were relativly late industrialisers, who are/were attempting/attempted to enter the world economy, after a period of protectionist industrialisation, while it was already dominated by other imperial powers (in the case of Germany; the UK, France and Holland?, and in the case of China; America and the EU?)?

This could be a very good discussion if people dont denouce eachother as tacit supporters of Amerikkka, or fans of the Beijing butchers or whatever

blake 3:17
28th May 2011, 23:10
It's pretty sad that the Brazilian Workers Party has been unable to develop a socially and ecologically sound model of development. I don't see anything wrong with Brazil and China having trade deals, it's on what basis.